JUDGMENT :

K.N. PHANEENDRA, J.

1. This appeal is preferred against the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the II Addl. Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Bangalore Rural District in Special Case No. 117/2006 for the offences punishable under Sections 419, 468, 114, 506 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

2. The Trial Court has sentenced the accused persons to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- for the offence under Section 419 of Indian Penal Code, simple imprisonment for a period of one year and Rs. 1,000/- fine for the offence under Section 506 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, simple imprisonment for a period of six months and Rs. 2,000/- fine for the offence under Section 3 Sub-Clause (1) Sub-Clause (v) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989, simple imprisonment for a period of two years and fine of Rs. 5,000/- for the offence under Section 468 of Indian Penal Code and also simple imprisonment for a period of two years and Rs. 5,000/- fine for the offence under Section 114 read with Section 468 of Indian Penal Code with default sentences.

3. Before adverting to the grounds urged before this Court by the learned Counsel for the appellants and as countered by the learned HCGP, it is just and necessary to have the brief factual matrix of the case.

4. The case of the prosecution is that a land bearing Sy. No. 232 measuring 2 acres 19 guntas of Somathanahalli Village, was originally granted to one Sonnappa S/o Nanjappa, who is none other than the grandfather of PW-5 and great grandfather of PW-6. The said Sonnappa died long back. About 20 years after his death, the accused No. 1 created a person as Sonnappa S/o Nanjappa and got a registered sale-deed in respect of the said survey number vide registered sale-deed dated 31.05.2005. Accused nos. 2 and 3 are the attestors to the said document. The allegations are that the accused Nos. 1 to 3 knowing fully well that the executant was not the person by name Sonnappa S/o Nanjappa, but he impersonated the said Sonnappa S/o Nanjappa and executed the sale-deed. Therefore, it is alleged that all the accused persons colluded with each other in creating a fake person as Sonnappa S/o Nanjappa and got executed the sale-deed. It is also the further case of the prosecution that when PWs. 5 and 6 have requested accused No. 1 to re-execute the sale-deed in their favour and give up the property, the accused Nos. 1 to 3 have threatened him with dire consequences and also abused them in filthy language referring to their caste and thereby it is the case of the prosecution that the accused persons have committed the above said offences alleged against them. The Special Court/Trial Court after securing the presence of the accused persons framed charges against them for the above said offences for which they were convicted. The accused persons have denied the allegations made against them and claimed to be tried.

5. The prosecution in order to bring home the guilt of the accused, examined 11 witnesses as PWs. 1 to 11 and got marked Exs.P1 to P16. The accused were also examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. but they did not choose to lead any defence evidence as such. After hearing both the sides, the Trial Court has recorded a judgment of conviction and order on sentence against the accused persons for the above said offences.

6. The learned Counsel for the appellants strenuously contends before the Court that there is absolutely no evidence before the Court in order to prove the guilt of the accused for the offences for which they were charged. The perfunctory investigation has been made and even accepting the examination-in-chief of all the witnesses, no case is made out against the accused persons. The Trial Court instead of putting the burden on the prosecution has wrongly put the burden on the accused stating that it is